Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Effects of conservation interventions on bats: a protocol for subject-wide evidence synthesis (2021 edition)

Authors: Anna Berthinussen1, Olivia C Richardson2, John D Altringham3, and Rebecca K Smith4

1. Conservation First, York, YO62 4DB, United Kingdom. 2. PhD student, University of Sheffield, S10 2TN, United Kingdom. 3. Emeritus Professor of Animal Ecology and Conservation in the School of Biology, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, United Kingdom. 4. Conservation Evidence, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, The David Attenborough Building, Cambridge, CB2 3QZ, United Kingdom.

1

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Reviewed by the following Advisory Board:

Fabio Bontadina SWILD – Urban Ecology and Wildlife Research Switzerland

Rachel Cooper- Bats Without Borders Zambia Bohannon

Jasja Dekker Jasja Dekker Dierecologie Netherlands

Brock Fenton University of Western Ontario Canada

Winifred Frick & Bat Conservation International USA colleagues Anita Glover Vincent Wildlife Trust United Kingdom

Katherine Boughey Bat Conservation Trust United Kingdom & colleagues Alice Hughes Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden United Kingdom & China David Jacobs University of Cape Town South Africa

Johnny de Jong Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Sweden

Júlia Luz Brazilian Society of Bat Research Brazil

Kirsty Park University of Stirling United Kingdom

Paul Racey University of Exeter United Kingdom

Orly Razgour University of Southampton United Kingdom

Guido Reiter Austrian Coordination Centre for Bat Austria Conservation and Research Luísa Rodrigues Institute for Nature Conservation and Forests Portugal

Danilo Russo University of Naples Frederico II Italy

Emma Stone African Bat Conservation United Kingdom & Malawi

Paul Webala Maasai Mara University Kenya

2

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Abstract

Bats are under pressure from multiple threats, including habitat loss and modification, disease, hunting, persecution and climate change, and many species are declining in number. There is therefore an increasing need for evidence-based conservation of bat populations. Reviewing the evidence can be a time-consuming and costly exercise. In general, the assessment of the evidence-base is approached on a case-by-case basis and different stakeholders independently conduct evidence reviews relative to their specific application or enquiry. This approach is counter to the philosophy of ‘produce once and use many times over’ and is a highly inefficient use of resources. In 2014, we used a subject-wide evidence synthesis approach to produce the Bat Conservation Synopsis, which summarised the available evidence for the effectiveness of the wide range of conservation interventions for bats. We updated the synopsis in 2019 and 2020 to incorporate new research, and we aim to publish a fourth edition in early 2021 to ensure that decision-makers have access to the most recent evidence. This protocol outlines the methods that will be used to synthesize evidence and update the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis.

Key Words: subject-wide evidence synthesis, bats, conservation, intervention, management

Background

Bats represent approximately one fifth of all mammal species with over 1,400 bat species currently known to science (Simmons & Cirranello 2019). They are also the most widely distributed order of terrestrial mammals occupying all areas of the world except the Arctic and Antarctica, although the greatest bat diversity is found in the tropics. Bats provide vital ecosystem services with ecological and economic benefits, such as pest suppression, pollination and seed dispersal (e.g. Boyles et al. 2011, Kunz et al. 2011). However, the life history of bats (typically low fecundity) makes them particularly vulnerable to extinction, and widespread population declines have been documented over the last few decades (e.g. Frick et al. 2019). Many bat species are threatened, particularly by anthropogenic impacts such as logging and deforestation, agriculture, urban and industrial development, pollution, hunting and persecution (e.g. see Voigt & Kingston 2016, Frick et al. 2019). Climate change and extreme weather events, such as heat waves and tropical storms, are also a threat to bats (e.g. Sherwin et al. 2013).

Five bat species are listed as extinct by the International Union of Conservation for Nature (IUCN) and almost one-fifth of bat species (18%) assessed by the IUCN are considered threatened (Frick et al. 2019). However, the actual number may be far greater given that insufficient data are available to assess the conservation status for a further 15% of bat species listed by the IUCN and many newly discovered species are not yet classified or included on the IUCN red list. Conservation efforts have been successful in reversing population declines for some species, and even preventing species extinctions. For example,

3

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy the lesser long-nosed bat was recently removed from endangered species lists in both the USA and Mexico after populations recovered following bat-friendly farming initiatives, education programs and roost protection (US Fish & Wildlife Service 2016).

Evidence-based knowledge is key for planning successful conservation strategies and for the cost-effective allocation of scarce conservation resources. Targeted reviews may be carried out to collate evidence on the effects of a particular conservation intervention, but this approach is labour-intensive, expensive and ill-suited for areas where the data are scarce and patchy. There is a paucity of evidence within the literature for the effectiveness of conservation interventions aimed at bats. As a result, very few targeted reviews exist, and those that do exist are inconclusive or limited in scope.

In 2014, we published the Bat Conservation Synopsis to collate evidence for bat conservation on a global scale (Berthinussen et al. 2014). We used a subject-wide evidence synthesis approach (Sutherland et al. 2019, Sutherland & Wordley 2018) to simultaneously summarize the evidence for the wide range of interventions dedicated to the conservation of bats. By simultaneously targeting all potential interventions for bats, we were able to review the evidence for each intervention cost-effectively and efficiently. The synopsis is freely available at www.conservationevidence.com and, alongside the Conservation Evidence online database, provides a valuable asset to the toolkit of practitioners and policy makers seeking sound information to support bat conservation. We aim to periodically update the synopsis to incorporate new research and ensure that the most recent evidence is available to decision-makers. Updates were published in 2019 (Berthinussen et al. 2019) and 2020 (Berthinussen et al. 2020), and a third update is planned for early 2021. This protocol outlines the methods that will be used to update the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis.

Scope of the review

1. Review subject This synthesis focuses on updating the evidence for the effectiveness of global interventions for the conservation of bats. New evidence will be added to the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis (Berthinussen et al. 2020), which was produced using a subject-wide evidence synthesis approach. This is defined as a systematic method of evidence synthesis that covers entire subjects at once, including all closed review topics within that subject at a fine scale and analysing results through study summary and expert assessment, or through meta- analysis; the term can also refer to any product arising from this process (Sutherland et al. 2019).

This synthesis covers evidence for the effects of conservation interventions for wild bats (i.e. not in captivity). We will not include evidence from the literature on husbandry of commercially reared bats or those kept in zoos. However, where these interventions are relevant to the conservation of wild declining or threatened species, they will be included,

4

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy e.g. captive breeding for the purpose of reintroductions. For this synthesis, conservation interventions will include management measures that aim to conserve wild bat populations and ameliorate the deleterious effects of threats. The output of the project will be an authoritative, freely accessible evidence-base that will support bat conservation objectives with the latest evidence and help to achieve conservation outcomes.

2. Advisory board An advisory board made up of international conservationists and academics with expertise in bat conservation has been formed. These experts will input into the synopsis update at three key stages: a) reviewing the protocol including identifying key sources of evidence, b) updating the comprehensive list of conservation interventions for review, and c) reviewing the updated draft evidence synthesis. The advisory board is listed above, although additional experts may be added during the production of the synopsis update. The final list will be published in the synopsis document and online (https://www.conservationevidence.com/site/page?view=methods).

3. Creating the list of interventions For the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis (Berthinussen et al. 2020), a comprehensive list of interventions was developed by searching the literature and in partnership with the advisory board. The list was also checked by Conservation Evidence to ensure that it followed the standard structure. This list will be reviewed for the synopsis update, and edited or additional interventions added if relevant. The aim is to include all interventions that have been carried out or advised to support populations or communities of wild bats, whether evidence for the effectiveness of an intervention is available or not. During the update process further interventions may also be discovered, which will be integrated into the synopsis structure. The list of interventions will be organized into categories based on the IUCN classifications of direct threats (http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical- documents/classification-schemes/threats-classification-scheme) and conservation actions (http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes/conservation- actions-classification-scheme-ver2).

Methods

Any new evidence found during the synopsis update will be summarised and added to the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis (Berthinussen et al. 2020). Methods for this update will follow those used for the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis as described below.

1. Literature searches Literature will be obtained from the Conservation Evidence discipline-wide literature database, and from searches of additional subject specific literature sources. The Conservation Evidence discipline-wide literature database is compiled using systematic searches of journals (all titles and abstracts) and report series (‘grey literature’); relevant

5

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy publications describing studies of conservation interventions for all species groups and habitats are saved from each and are added to the database. a) Global evidence Evidence from all around the world will be included. b) Languages included The following non-English journals published in Spanish and Portuguese were searched for the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis (Berthinussen et al. 2020) and relevant papers extracted. Due to project constraints, update searches of these journals will not be carried out on this occasion. However, we will aim to update them periodically in the future.

• Therya Vol. 1, Issue 1 (2010) – Vol. 8, Issue 3 (2018) • Galemys Vol. 1 (2011) – Vol. 7 (2017) • Boletim da Sociedade Brasileira de Vol. 66 (2013) – Vol. 78 (2017) Mastozoologia • Mastozoologia Neotropical Vol. 1, Issue 1 (1994) – Vol. 24, Issue 1 (2017) • Chiroptera Neotropical Vol. 1, Issue 1 (1995) – Vol. 21, Issue 2 (2015) • Mammalogy Notes Vol. 1, Issue 1 (2014) – Vol. 4, Issue 1 (2017) • Revista Mexicana de Mastozoología Vol. 1 (1995) – Vol. 7, Issue 2 (2017)

Since the last update, over 140 additional journals published in Spanish, Portuguese, German, Russian, Japanese and Persian have also been searched by other authors and relevant papers added to the Conservation Evidence discipline-wide literature database (see below).

All other journals searched are published in English (see below). c) Journals searched

All journals (and years) listed in Appendix 1 (English journals) and Appendix 2 (non-English journals) have been searched and relevant papers added to the Conservation Evidence discipline-wide literature database. Those published up until the end of 2018 were included in the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis (Berthinussen et al. 2020). More recent relevant papers will be included in this update. An asterisk indicates the journals most relevant to this synopsis. Others are less likely to have included relevant papers, but if they did, they have previously been or will be summarised.

For this update, additional searches up to the end of 2019 will be undertaken for journals likely to yield studies for bats (marked with an asterisk in Appendix 1). No new journal searches will be undertaken as the specialist journals most likely to yield studies relevant to bat conservation are already included.

6

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy d) Reports from specialist websites searched

i) From Conservation Evidence discipline-wide literature database All report series (and years) below have already been searched for the Conservation Evidence project and relevant studies were included in the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis (Berthinussen et al. 2020). An asterisk indicates the report series most relevant to this synopsis. Others are less likely to have included reports relevant to this synopsis, but if they did they have been summarised.

• Amphibian Survival Alliance 1994–2012 Vol 9 – Vol 104 • British Trust for Ornithology 1981–2016 Report 1–687 • IUCN Invasive Species Specialist Group 1995–2013 Vol 1 – Vol 33 • Scottish Natural Heritage 2004–2018 Reports 1–945

ii) Specific searches for the Bat Conservation Synopsis The following specialist reports/websites relevant to bat conservation have already been searched for the existing Bat Conservation Synopsis (Berthinussen et al. 2020). Searches were carried out either by searching every report title and abstract or summary within each report series or relevant category, or using key words, and any relevant reports were added to the project database. For this update, all specialist reports/websites listed below will be searched up to the end of 2019.

• Bat Conservation International (www.batcon.org, resources searched) • Bat Conservation Trust, UK (www.bats.org.uk, resources searched) • Rufford Foundation, UK (www.rufford.org, report titles searched for category ‘Bats’) • The Vincent Wildlife Trust, UK (www.vwt.org.uk, report titles searched for category ‘Bats’) • Scottish Natural Heritage, UK (www.nature.scot/information-library-data-and- research/information-library, database of report titles searched using key word ‘bat*’) • Natural England, UK (publications.naturalengland.org.uk, database of report titles searched for category ‘Species – Mammals – Bats’) • Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (Defra) Science and Research projects, UK (sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk, database of report titles searched using key word ‘bats’) e) Other literature searches The online database (www.conservationevidence.com) will be searched for relevant publications that have already been summarised.

Where a systematic review is found for an intervention, if the intervention has a small literature (<20 papers), all publications including the systematic review will be summarised. If the intervention has a large literature (≥20 papers), then only the systematic review and any publications published since the review will be summarised. Where a non-systematic review

7

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

(or editorial, synthesis, preface, introduction etc.) is found for an intervention, all relevant publications referenced within it will be included, but the review itself will not be summarised. However, if the review also provides new/collective data, then the review itself will also be included/summarised (indicating which other summarized publications it includes). Relevant publications cited in other publications summarised for the synopsis will not be included (due to time restrictions). f) Supplementary literature identified by advisory board or relevant stakeholders Additional journal or specialist website searches, and relevant papers or reports suggested by the advisory board or relevant stakeholders will also be included, where time permits.

Additional searches may be added during the production of the synopsis update. The final list of evidence sources searched for this synopsis will be published in the synopsis document (including a summary using Appendix 3), and the full list of journals and report series searched published online (www.conservationevidence.com/journalsearcher/synopsis). g) Search record database A database will be created of all relevant publications found during searches. Reasons for exclusion will be recorded for all those included during screening that are not summarised for the synopsis.

2. Publication screening and inclusion criteria

A summary of the total number of evidence sources and papers/reports screened will be published in the updated synopsis using the diagram in Appendix 3. a) Screening To ensure consistency/accuracy when screening publications for inclusion in the literature database, an initial test using the Conservation Evidence inclusion criteria (provided below) and a consistent set of references was carried out by authors, compared with the decisions of the experienced core Conservation Evidence team. Results were analysed using Cohen’s Kappa test (Cohen 1960). Where initial results did not show ‘substantial’ (K = 0.61–0.8) or ‘almost perfect’ agreement (K = 0.81–1.0), authors were given further training. A second Kappa test will be used to assess the consistency/accuracy of article screening for the first two years of the first journal searched by each author. Again, where results do not show ‘substantial’ (K = 0 .61–0.8) or ‘almost perfect’ agreement (K = 0.81–1.0), authors will receive further training before carrying out further searches.

Authors of other synopses who have searched journals and added relevant publications to the Conservation Evidence literature database since 2018, and all other searchers since 2017 have undertaken the initial paper inclusion test described above; searchers prior to that have not. Kappa tests of the first two years searched have been carried out for all new searchers who have contributed to the Conservation Evidence literature database since July 2018.

8

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

We acknowledge that the literature search and screening method used by Conservation Evidence, as with any method, will result in gaps in the evidence. The Conservation Evidence literature database currently includes relevant papers from over 300 English language journals as well as over 140 non-English journals. Additional journals are frequently added to those searched, and years searched are often updated. It is possible that searchers will have missed relevant papers from those journals searched. Publication bias will not be taken into account, and it is likely that additional biases will result from the evidence that is available, for example there are often geographic biases in study locations. b) Inclusion criteria The following Conservation Evidence inclusion criteria will be used.

Criteria A: Conservation Evidence includes studies that measure the effect of an intervention that might be done to conserve biodiversity

1. Does this study measure the effect of an intervention that is or was under the control of humans, on wild taxa (including captives), habitats, or invasive/problem taxa? If yes, go to 3. If no, go to 2. 2. Does this study measure the effect of an intervention that is or was under the control of humans, on human behaviour that is relevant to conserving biodiversity? If yes, go to Criteria B. If no, the study will be excluded. 3. Could the intervention be put in place by a conservationist/decision maker to protect, manage, restore or reduce impacts of threats to wild taxa or habitats, or control or mitigate the impact of the invasive/problem taxon on wild taxa or habitats? If yes, the study will be included. If no, the study will be excluded. Explanation:

1. a. Study must have a measured outcome on wild taxa, habitats or invasive species: excludes studies on domestic/agricultural species, theoretical modelling or opinion pieces. See Criteria B for interventions that have a measured outcome on human behaviour only.

1. b. Intervention must be carried out by people: excludes impacts from natural processes (e.g. tree falls, natural fires), impacts from background variation (e.g. soil type, vegetation, climate change), correlations with habitat types, where there is no test of a specific intervention by humans, or pure ecology (e.g. movement, distribution of species).

2. Study must test an intervention that could be put in place for conservation. This excludes assessing impacts of threats (interventions which remove threats would be included), unless the threat acts as an appropriate control for an intervention. For example, a woodland that has been cut down/degraded could be compared with woodland that has been left intact to test the intervention ‘Retain native woodland’. The test may involve comparisons between sites/factors not originally put in place or modified for conservation but which could be (e.g.

9

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy mown vs unmown field margins, fenced vs unfenced cave entrances – where the mowing/fencing is as you would do for conservation, even if that was not the original intention in the study).

If the title and/or abstract are suggestive of fulfilling our criteria, but there is not sufficient information to judge whether the intervention was under human control, the intervention could be applied by a conservationist/decision maker or whether there are data quantifying the outcome, then the study will be included. If the article has no abstract, but the title is suggestive, then a study will be included.

We sort articles into folders by which taxon/habitat they have an outcome on. If the title/abstract does not specify which species/taxa/habitats are impacted, then the full article will be searched and then assigned to folders accordingly.

The outcome for wild taxa/habitats can be negative, neutral or positive, does not have to be statistically significant but must be quantified (if hard to judge from abstract, then it will be included for closer inspection by the synopsis authors). It could be any outcome that has implications for the health of individuals, populations, species, communities or habitats, including, but not limited to the following:

• Individual health, condition or behaviour, including in captivity: e.g. growth, size, weight, stress, disease levels or immune function, movement, use of natural/artificial habitat/structure, range, predatory or nuisance behaviour that could lead to retaliatory action by humans. • Breeding: egg/sperm production, sperm motility/viability after freezing, artificial fertilization success, mating success, birth rate, pup condition/survival, ‘overall recruitment’. • Genetics: genetic diversity, genetic suitability (e.g. adaptation to local conditions, use of flyways for migratory species etc.). • Life history: age/size at maturity, survival, mortality. • Population measures: number, abundance, density, presence/absence, biomass, movement, cover, age-structure, species distributions (only in response to a human action), disease prevalence, sex ratio. • Community/habitat measures: species richness, diversity measures (including trait/functional diversity), community composition, community structure (e.g. trophic structure), area covered (e.g. by different habitat types), physical habitat structure (e.g. rugosity, height, basal area).

Interventions within the scope of Conservation Evidence include: • Clear management interventions, e.g. closing a cave to tourism, prescribed burning, mowing, controlling invasive species, creating or restoring habitats • International or national policies • Reintroductions or management of wild species in captivity

10

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

• Interventions that reduce human-wildlife conflict • Interventions that change human behaviour, resulting in an impact on wild taxa or habitats See https://www.conservationevidence.com/data/index for more examples of interventions.

Note on study types: Literature reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses or short notes that review studies that fulfil these criteria will be included.

Theoretical modelling studies will be excluded, as no intervention has been taken. However, studies that use models to analyse real-world data, or compare models to real-world situations will be included (if they otherwise fulfil these criteria).

Criteria B: Conservation Evidence includes studies that measure the effect of an intervention that might be done to change human behaviour for the benefit of biodiversity

1. Does this study measure the effect of an intervention that is or was under human control on human behaviour (actual or intentional) which is likely to protect, manage, restore or reduce threats to wild taxa or habitats? If yes, go to 2. If no, the study will be excluded. 2. Could the intervention be put in place by a conservationist, manager or decision maker to change human behaviour? If yes, the study will be included. If no, the study will be excluded.

Explanation:

1. a. Study must have a measured outcome on actual or intentional human behaviour including self-reported behaviours: excludes outcomes on human psychology (tolerance, knowledge, awareness, attitude, perceptions or beliefs)

1. b. change in human behaviour must be linked to outcomes for wild taxa and habitats, excludes changes in behaviour linked to outcomes for human benefit, even if these occurred under a conservation program (e.g. we would exclude a study demonstrating increased school attendance in villages under a community based conservation program)

1. c. Intervention must be under human control: excludes impacts from climatic or other natural events.

2. Study must test an intervention that could be put in place for conservation: excludes studies with no intervention, e.g. correlating human personality traits with likelihood of conservation-related behaviours. The human behaviour outcome of the study can be negative, neutral or positive, does not have to be statistically significant but must be quantified (if hard to judge from abstract, then

11

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy it will be included). It could be any behaviour that is likely to have an outcome on wild taxa and habitats (including mitigating the impact of invasive/problem taxon on wild taxa or habitats). Interventions include, but are not limited to the following:

• Change in adverse behaviours (which directly threaten biodiversity), e.g. unsustainable hunting, burning, grazing, urban encroachment, creating noise, entering sensitive areas, polluting or dumping waste, clearing or habitat destruction, introducing invasive species. • Change in positive behaviours, e.g. uptake of alternative/sustainable livelihoods, number of households adopting sustainable practices, donations. • Change in policy or conservation methods, e.g. placement of protected areas, protection of key habitats/species. • Change in consumer or market behaviour, e.g. purchasing, consuming, buying, willingness to pay, selling, illegal trading, advertising, consumer fraud. • Behavioural intentions to do any of the above.

Interventions which are particularly likely to have a behaviour change outcome include, but are not limited to the following:

• Enforcement: hunting restrictions, market inspections, increase number of rangers, patrols or frequency of patrols in, around or within protected areas, improve fencing/physical barriers, improve signage. • Behaviour change: promote alternative/sustainable livelihoods, payment for ecosystem services, ecotourism, poverty reduction, increased appreciation or knowledge, debunking misinformation, altering or re-enforcing local taboos, financial incentives. • Governance: protect or reward whistle-blowers, increase government transparency, ensure independence of judiciary, provide legal aid. • Market regulation: trade bans, taxation, supply chain transparency laws. • Consumer demand reduction: increase awareness or knowledge, fear appeals (negative association with undesirable product), benefit appeal (positive association with desirable behaviour), worldview framing, moral framing, employing decision defaults, providing decision support tools, simplifying advice to consumers, promoting desirable social norms, legislative prohibition. • Sustainable Alternatives: certification schemes, artificial alternatives, sustainable alternatives. • New policies for conservation/protection.

We allocate studies to folders by their outcome. All studies under Criteria B go in the ‘Behaviour change’ folder. They are additionally duplicated into a taxon/habitat folder if there is a specific intended final outcome of the behaviour change (if none mentioned, they will be filed only in Behaviour change).

12

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy c) Relevant subject Studies relevant to the synopsis subject will include those focused on the conservation of wild, native bats. d) Relevant types of intervention An intervention has to be one that could be put in place by a manager, conservationist, policy maker, advisor or consultant to protect, manage, restore or reduce the impacts of threats to wild, native bats. Alternatively, interventions may aim to change human behaviour (actual or intentional), which is likely to protect, manage, restore or reduce threats to bat populations. See inclusion criteria above for further details.

If the following two criteria are met, a combined intervention will be created within the synopsis, rather than repeating evidence under all the separate interventions: a) there are five or more publications that use the same well-defined combination of interventions, with very clear description of what they were, without separating the effects of each individual intervention, and b) the combined set of interventions is a commonly used conservation strategy.

e) Relevant types of comparator To determine the effectiveness of interventions, studies must include a comparison, i.e. monitoring change over time (typically before and after the intervention was implemented), or for example at treatment and control sites. Alternatively, a study could compare one specific intervention (or implementation method) against another. For example, this could be comparing the abundance of a bat species before and after woodland is restored, or the reduction in bat mortality at wind turbines with different rotor designs.

Exceptions, which may not have a control but will still be included, are for example the effectiveness of captive breeding or rehabilitation programmes. f) Relevant types of outcome Below we provide a list of anticipated metrics; others will be included if reported within relevant studies.

− Community response - Community composition - Richness/diversity − Population response - Abundance: bat activity, number, density, presence/absence, biomass, movement, age-structure, sex ratio - Reproductive success: egg/sperm production, artificial fertilization success, mating success, birth rate, pup condition, overall recruitment, age/size at maturity - Survival: survival, mortality

13

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

- Condition: growth, size, weight, condition factors, biochemical ratios, stress, disease levels or immune function − Behaviour - Uptake - Use - Behaviour change: movement, use of natural/artificial habitat/structure, range, predatory or nuisance behaviour that could lead to retaliatory action by humans - Change in human behaviour − Other - Impact on roost sites g) Relevant types of study design The table below lists the study designs included. The strongest evidence comes from randomized, replicated, controlled trials with paired-sites and before and after monitoring.

Table 1. Study designs Term Meaning

Replicated The intervention was repeated on more than one individual or site. In conservation and ecology, the number of replicates is much smaller than it would be for medical trials (when thousands of individuals are often tested). If the replicates are sites, pragmatism dictates that between five and ten replicates is a reasonable amount of replication, although more would be preferable. We provide the number of replicates wherever possible. Replicates should reflect the number of times an intervention has been independently carried out, from the perspective of the study subject. For example, 10 plots within a mown field might be independent replicates from the perspective of plants with limited dispersal, but not independent replicates for larger motile animals such as birds. In the case of translocations/release of captive bred animals, replicates should be sites, not individuals.

Randomized The intervention was allocated randomly to individuals or sites. This means that the initial condition of those given the intervention is less likely to bias the outcome.

Paired sites Sites are considered in pairs, within which one was treated with the intervention and the other was not. Pairs, or blocks, of sites are selected with similar environmental conditions, such as soil type or surrounding landscape. This approach aims to reduce environmental variation and make it easier to detect a true effect of the intervention.

Controlled* Individuals or sites treated with the intervention are compared with control individuals or sites not treated with the intervention. (The treatment is usually allocated by the investigators (randomly or not), such that the treatment or control groups/sites could have received the treatment).

Before-and-after Monitoring of effects was carried out before and after the intervention was imposed.

14

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Site comparison* A study that considers the effects of interventions by comparing sites that historically had different interventions (e.g. intervention vs no intervention) or levels of intervention. Unlike controlled studies, it is not clear how the interventions were allocated to sites (i.e. the investigators did not allocate the treatment to some of the sites).

Review A conventional review of literature. Generally, these have not used an agreed search protocol or quantitative assessments of the evidence.

Systematic review A systematic review follows an agreed set of methods for identifying studies and carrying out a formal ‘meta-analysis’. It will weight or evaluate studies according to the strength of evidence they offer, based on the size of each study and the rigour of its design. All environmental systematic reviews are available at: www.environmentalevidence.org/index.htm

Study If none of the above apply, for example a study looking at the number of people that were engaged in an awareness raising project. Or a study measuring change over time in only one site and only after an intervention.

* Note that “controlled” is mutually exclusive from “site comparison”. A comparison cannot be both controlled and a site comparison. However, one study might contain both controlled and site comparison aspects e.g. study of fertilized grassland, compared to unfertilized plots (controlled) and natural, target grassland (site comparison).

3. Study quality assessment & critical appraisal

We will not quantitatively assess the evidence from each publication or weight it according to quality. However, to allow interpretation of the evidence, we make the size and design of each study we report clear.

We will critically appraise each potentially relevant study and will exclude those that do not provide data for a comparison to the treatment, do not statistically analyse the results (or if included this will be stated in the summary paragraph) or have obvious errors in their design or analysis. A record of the reason for excluding any of the publications included during screening will be kept within the synopsis database.

4. Data extraction

Data on the effectiveness of the relevant intervention (e.g. mean species abundance inside or outside a protected area; reduction in mortality after operational changes to wind turbines) will be extracted from, and summarised for, publications that include the relevant subject, types of intervention, comparator and outcomes outlined above. A summary of the total number of evidence sources and papers/reports searched and the total number of publications included following data extraction will be published in the updated synopsis using the diagram in Appendix 3.

15

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

At the start of each month, authors will swap three summaries with another author to ensure that the correct type of data has been extracted and that the summary follows the Conservation Evidence standard format. 5. Evidence synthesis a) Summary protocol Each publication will usually have just one paragraph for each intervention it tests describing the study in (usually) no more than 150 words using plain English. Each summary will be in the following format:

A [TYPE OF STUDY] in [YEARS X-Y] in [HOW MANY SITES] in/of [HABITAT] in [REGION and COUNTRY] [REFERENCE] found that [INTERVENTION] [SUMMARY OF ALL KEY RESULTS] for [SPECIES/HABITAT TYPE]. [DETAILS OF KEY RESULTS, INCLUDING DATA]. In addition, [EXTRA RESULTS, IMPLEMENTATION OPTIONS, CONFLICTING RESULTS]. The [DETAILS OF EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN, INTERVENTION METHODS and KEY DETAILS OF SITE CONTEXT]. Data was collected in [DETAILS OF SAMPLING METHODS].

Type of study - use terms and order in Table 1.

Site context - for the sake of brevity, only nuances essential to the interpretation of the results are included. The reader is always encouraged to read the original source to get a full understanding of the study site (e.g. history of management, physical conditions).

For example:

A replicated study in 1999–2004 in a wetland on an island in Catalonia, Spain (1) found that all 69 bat boxes of two different designs were used by soprano pipistrelles Pipistrellus pygmaeus with an average occupancy rate of 71%. During at least one of the four breeding seasons recorded, 96% of boxes were occupied and occupation rates by females with pups increased from 15% in 2000 to 53% in 2003. Bat box preferences were detected in the breeding season only, with higher abundance in east-facing bat boxes (average 22 bats/box) compared to west-facing boxes (12 bats/box), boxes with double compartments (average 25 bats/box) compared to single compartments (12 bats/box) and boxes placed on posts (average 18 bats/box) and houses (average 12 bats/box). Abundance was low in bat boxes on trees (average 2 bats/box). A total of 69 wooden bat boxes (10 cm deep x 19 cm wide x 20 cm high) of two types (44 single and 25 double compartment) were placed on three supports (10 trees, 29 buildings and 30 electricity posts) facing east and west. From July 2000 to February 2004, the boxes were checked on 16 occasions. Bats were counted in boxes or upon emergence when numbers were too numerous to count within the box.

(1) Flaquer C., Torre I. & Ruiz-Jarillo R. (2006) The value of bat-boxes in the conservation of Pipistrellus pygmaeus in wetland rice paddies. Biological Conservation, 128, 223–230.

A replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in 1993–1999 of five harvested hardwood forests in Virginia, USA (2) found that harvesting trees in groups did not result in higher salamander abundances than clearcutting. Abundance was similar between treatments (group cut: 3;

16

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

clearcut: 1/30 m2). Abundance was significantly lower compared to unharvested plots (6/30 m2). Species composition differed before and three years after harvest. There were five sites with 2 ha plots with each treatment: group harvesting (2–3 small area group harvests with selective harvesting between), clearcutting and an unharvested control. Salamanders were monitored on 9–15 transects (2 x 15 m)/plot at night in April–October. One or two years of pre-harvest and 1–4 years of post- harvest data were collected.

(2) Knapp S.M., Haas C.A., Harpole D.N. & Kirkpatrick R.L. (2003) Initial effects of clearcutting and alternative silvicultural practices on terrestrial salamander abundance. Conservation Biology, 17, 752–762. b) Terminology used to describe the evidence Unless specifically stated otherwise, results will reflect statistical tests performed on the data, i.e. we will only state that there was a difference if it was a significant difference or will state that there was no difference if it was not significant. Table 1 above defines the terms used to describe the study designs. c) Dealing with multiple interventions within a publication When separate results are provided for the effects of each of the different interventions tested, separate summaries will be written under each intervention heading. However, when several interventions were carried out at the same time and only the combined effect reported, the result will be described with a similar paragraph under all relevant interventions. The first sentence will make it clear that there was a combination of interventions carried out, i.e. ‘...... (REF) found that [x intervention], along with [y] and [z interventions] resulted in [describe effects]’. Within the results section we will also add a sentence such as: ‘It is not clear whether these effects were a direct result of [x], [y] or [z] interventions', or 'The study does not distinguish between the effects of [x], and other interventions carried out at the same time: [y] and [z].' d) Dealing with multiple publications reporting the same results and reviews If two publications describe results from the same intervention implemented in the same space and at the same time, we will only include the most stringently peer-reviewed publication (i.e. journal of the highest impact factor). If one includes initial results (e.g. after year one) of another (e.g. after 1-3 years), we will only include the publication covering the longest time span. If two publications describe at least partially different results, we will include both but make clear they are from the same project in the paragraph, e.g. ‘A controlled study... (Gallagher et al. 1999; same experimental set-up as Oasis et al. 2001)...’.

Basic (i.e. not systematic) reviews will only be summarised if they provide new/collective data; the individual publications will also be summarised to provide full details of each study. Publications identified in all other basic reviews will be obtained and summarised individually (where time allows). Where there is a systematic review of an intervention with a large associated literature (≥20 papers), the systematic review will be summarised along

17

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy with any papers/reports published since the systematic review. If the intervention has a small literature (<20 papers), all publications including the systematic review will be summarised. e) Taxonomy Taxonomy will not be updated but will follow that used in the original publication. Where possible, common names and Latin names will both be given the first time each species is mentioned within each summary. f) Key messages Each intervention for which evidence is found will have a set of concise, bulleted key messages at the top, written once all the literature has been summarised. These will include information such as the number, design and location of studies included.

The first bullet point will describe the total number of studies that tested the intervention and the locations of the studies, followed by key information on the relevant metrics presented under the headings and sub-headings shown below (with number of relevant studies in parentheses for each).

● X studies examined the effects of [INTERVENTION] on [TARGET POPULATION]. Y studies were in [LOCATION 1]1,2 and Z studies were in [LOCATION 2]3,4. Locations will usually be countries, ordered based on chronological order of studies rather than alphabetically, i.e. USA1, Australia2 not Australia2, USA1. However, when more than 4-5 separate countries, they may be grouped into regions to make it clearer e.g. Europe, North America. The distribution of studies amongst habitat types may also be added here if relevant.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (x STUDIES) ● Community composition (x studies): ● Richness/diversity (x studies):

POPULATION RESPONSE (x STUDIES) ● Abundance (x studies): ● Reproductive success (x studies): ● Survival (x studies): ● Condition (x studies):

BEHAVIOUR (x STUDIES) ● Uptake (x studies): ● Use (x studies): ● Behaviour change (x studies):

18

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

OTHER (x STUDIES) (Included only for interventions/chapters where relevant) ● [Sub-heading(s) for the metric(s) reported will be created] (x studies):

If no evidence is found for an intervention, the following text will be added in place of the key messages above:

● We found no studies that evaluated the effects of [INTERVENTION] on [TARGET POPULATION].

‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.

6. Dissemination/communication of evidence synthesis

The information from this synopsis update will be available in three ways:

● An updated synopsis pdf, downloadable from www.conservationevidence.com, will contain the study summaries, key messages and background information on each intervention. ● The searchable database at www.conservationevidence.com will contain all the summarized information from the synopsis update, along with expert assessment scores. ● A chapter in What Works in Conservation, available as a pdf to download and a book from www.conservationevidence.com/content/page/79 will contain the key messages from the synopsis as well as expert assessment scores on the effectiveness and certainty of the synopsis, with links to the online database.

19

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Acknowledgements

Our thanks to Professor William Sutherland, Dr Claire Wordley and Dr Ricardo Rocha for their help and advice.

Funding

The Bat Conservation Synopsis and subsequent updates have been prepared with funding from Natural England and Pettersson Elektronik (Uppsala Science Park, Dag Hammarskjolds v. 34A, S-751 83, UPPSALA, SWEDEN, www.batsound.com) (first edition, 2014); Arcadia (2020 edition), and the MAVA Foundation (2019 and 2021 edition).

20

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

References

Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2014) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Available at: https://www.conservationevidence.com/synopsis/download/22

Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2019) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Available at: https://www.conservationevidence.com/synopsis/download/8

Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2020) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Available at: https://www.conservationevidence.com/synopsis/pdf/27

Cohen, J. (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.

Frick, W.F., Kingston, T. & Flanders, J. (2019) A review of the major threats and challenges to global bat conservation. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2019, 1-21.

Kunz, T. H., de Torrez, E. B., Bauer, D., Lobova, T., and Fleming, T. H. (2011). Ecosystem services provided by bats. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1223, 1–38.

Sherwin H.A., Montgomery W.I. & Lundy M.G. (2013) The impact and implications of climate change for bats. Mammal Review, 43, 171–182.

Simmons, N.B. and A.L. Cirranello. 2019. Bat Species of the World: A taxonomic and geographic database. Accessed on 08/08/2019. www.batnames.org

Sutherland, W.J., Taylor, N.G., MacFarlane, D., Amano, T., Christie, A.P., Dicks, L.V., Lemasson, A.J., Littlewood, N.A., Martin, P.A., Ockendon, N., Petrovan, S.O., Robertson, R.J., Rocha, R., Shackelford, G.E., Smith, R.K., Tyler, E.H.M., & Wordley, C.F.R. (2019) Building a tool to overcome barriers in the research- implementation space: the Conservation Evidence database. Biological Conservation, 238, 108199.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2016) Species status assessment for the lesser long-nosed bat. December 2016. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, NM. 96 pp.

Voigt, C.C. & T. Kingston (2016) Bats in the Anthropocene: Conservation of Bats in a Changing World. Springer International Publishing.

21

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

APPENDIX 1. English journals (and years) searched English journals (and years) searched and for which relevant papers have been added to the Conservation Evidence discipline-wide literature database. An asterisk indicates the journals most relevant to this synopsis.

Journal Years searched Topic Acrocephalus 2009–2018 All biodiversity Acta Chiropterologica* 1999–2018 All biodiversity Acta Herpetologica 2006–2018 All biodiversity Acta Oecologica 1990–2018 All biodiversity Acta Theriologica 1977–2014 All biodiversity African Bird Club Bulletin 1994–2017 All biodiversity African Journal of Ecology 1963–2016 All biodiversity African Journal of Herpetology 1990–2018 All biodiversity African Journal of Marine Science 1983–2018 All biodiversity African Primates 1995–2012 All biodiversity African Sea Turtle Newsletter 2014–2018 All biodiversity African Zoology 1979–2013 All biodiversity Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment* 1983–2019 All biodiversity Ambio 1972–2011 All biodiversity American Journal of Primatology 1981–2019 All biodiversity American Naturalist* 1867–2018 All biodiversity Amphibia-Reptilia 1980–2018 All biodiversity Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 1996–2018 All biodiversity Animal Biology 2003–2013 All biodiversity Animal Conservation* 1998–2019 All biodiversity Animal Nutrition 2015–2019 All biodiversity Animal Welfare 1992–2019 All biodiversity Animals 2011–2019 All biodiversity Annales Zoologici Fennici 1964–2013 All biodiversity Annales Zoologici Societatis Zoologicae Botanicae 1932–1963 All biodiversity Fennicae Vanamo Annual Review Ecology and Systematics* 1970–2019 All biodiversity Antarctic Science 1980–2018 All biodiversity Anthrozoos 1987–2019 All biodiversity Apidologie 1958–2009 All biodiversity Applied Animal Behaviour Science 1984–2019 All biodiversity Applied Herpetology 2003–2009 All biodiversity Applied Vegetation Science 1998–2017 All biodiversity Aquaculture Research 1972–2008 All biodiversity Aquarium Sciences and Conservation 1997–2001 All biodiversity Aquatic Biology 2007–2018 All biodiversity Aquatic Botany 1975–2017 All biodiversity Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater 1991–2018 All biodiversity Ecosystems

22

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Aquatic Ecology 1968–2018 All biodiversity Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management 1998–2018 All biodiversity Aquatic Invasions 2006–2016 All biodiversity Aquatic Living Resources 1988–2018 All biodiversity Aquatic Mammals 1972–2018 All biodiversity Arid Land Research and Management 1987–2013 All biodiversity Asian Herpetological Research 2010–2018 All biodiversity Asian Primates 2008–2012 All biodiversity Asiatic Herpetological Research 1993–2008 All biodiversity Auk 1980–2016 All biodiversity Austral Ecology* 1977–2018 All biodiversity Australasian Journal of Herpetology 2009–2012 All biodiversity Australian Mammalogy* 2000–2018 All biodiversity Avian Conservation and Ecology 2005–2016 All biodiversity Basic & Applied Herpetology 2011–2018 All biodiversity Basic and Applied Ecology* 2000–2019 All biodiversity Behavior 1948–2013 All biodiversity Behavior Ecology 1990–2013 All biodiversity Biawak 2001–2017 All biodiversity Bibliotheca Herpetologica 1999–2017 All biodiversity Biocontrol 1956–2016 All biodiversity Biocontrol Science and Technology 1991–1996 All biodiversity Biodiversity 2000–2018 All biodiversity Biodiversity and Conservation* 1994–2019 All biodiversity Biological Conservation* 1981–2019 All biodiversity Biological Control 1991–2017 All biodiversity Biological Invasions 1999–2017 All biodiversity Biology and Environment: Proceedings of the 1993–2017 All biodiversity Royal Irish Academy Biology Letters 2005–2018 All biodiversity Biotropica* 1990–2018 All biodiversity Bird Conservation International 1991–2016 All biodiversity Bird Study 1980–2016 All biodiversity Boreal Environment Research 1996–2014 All biodiversity Bulletin of the Chicago Herpetological Society 1990–2018 All biodiversity Bulletin of the Herpetological Society of Japan 1999–2008 All biodiversity Bulletin of the Maryland Herpetological Society 1980–2015 All biodiversity Canadian Field Naturalist 1987–2018 All biodiversity Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 1901–2018 All biodiversity Canadian Journal of Forest Research 1971–2018 All biodiversity Caribbean Herpetology 2010–2018 All biodiversity Caribbean Journal of Science 1961–2013 All biodiversity CCAMLR Science 1985–2016 All biodiversity Chelonian Conservation and Biology 1993–2018 All biodiversity Chelonian Research Monographs 1996–2017 All biodiversity

23

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Coastal Engineering 2000–2018 All biodiversity Collinsorum 2012–2016 All biodiversity Community Ecology 2000–2012 All biodiversity Conservation Biology* 1987–2019 All biodiversity Conservation Evidence* 2004–2019 All biodiversity Conservation Genetics 2000–2013 All biodiversity Conservation Letters* 2008–2019 All biodiversity Contemporary Herpetology 1998–2009 All biodiversity Contributions to Primatology 1974–1991 All biodiversity Copeia 1910–2018 All biodiversity Copeia 2004–2016 Reptile Conservation Cunninghamia 1981–2016 All biodiversity Current Herpetology 1964–2018 All biodiversity Dodo 1977–2001 All biodiversity Ecological and Environmental Anthropology 2005–2008 All biodiversity Ecological Applications* 1991–2019 All biodiversity Ecological Entomology 1985–2018 All biodiversity Ecological Indicators 2001–2007 All biodiversity Ecological Management & Restoration* 2000–2018 All biodiversity Ecological Restoration* 1981–2019 All biodiversity Ecology* 1936–2019 All biodiversity Ecology Letters 1998–2019 All biodiversity Écoscience 1994–2019 All biodiversity Ecosystems 1998–2013 All biodiversity Emu 1980–2016 All biodiversity Endangered Species Bulletin 1966–2003 All biodiversity Endangered Species Research 2004–2019 All biodiversity Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 2015–2018 All biodiversity Environmental Conservation* 1974–2019 All biodiversity Environmental Entomology 1990–2018 All biodiversity Environmental Evidence* 2012–2019 All biodiversity Environmental Management* 1977–2019 All biodiversity Environmentalist 1981–1988 All biodiversity Estuaries and Coasts 2013–2017 All biodiversity Ethology Ecology & Evolution 1989–2014 All biodiversity European Journal of Soil Science 1950–2012 Soil Fertility European Journal of Wildlife Research* 2004–2019 All biodiversity Evolutionary Anthropology 1992–2014 All biodiversity Evolutionary Ecology 1987–2014 All biodiversity Evolutionary Ecology Research 1999–2014 All biodiversity Fire Ecology 2005–2016 All biodiversity Fish and Fisheries 2000–2018 All biodiversity Fisheries 2017–2018 All biodiversity Fisheries Management and Ecology 1990–2018 All biodiversity

24

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Fisheries Oceanography 1992–2018 All biodiversity Fisheries Research 1990–2018 All biodiversity Flora 1991–2017 All biodiversity Folia Primatologica 1963–2014 All biodiversity Folia Zoologica 1959–2013 All biodiversity Forest Ecology and Management* 1976–2018 All biodiversity Freshwater Biology 1975–2016 All biodiversity Freshwater Science 1982–2018 All biodiversity Frontiers in Marine Science 2017–2018 All biodiversity Frontiers in Psychology 2019 All biodiversity Functional Ecology 1987–2013 All biodiversity Genetics and Molecular Research 2002–2013 All biodiversity Geoderma 1967–2012 Soil Fertility Gibbon Journal 2005–2011 All biodiversity Global Change Biology 1995–2017 All biodiversity Global Ecology and Biogeography 1991–2014 All biodiversity Global Ecology and Conservation 2014–2018 All biodiversity Grass and Forage Science 1980–2017 All biodiversity Herpetofauna 2003–2007 All biodiversity Herpetologica 1936–2018 All biodiversity Herpetologica 2013–2016 Reptile Conservation Herpetological Bulletin 1980–2003 Amphibian Conservation Herpetological Bulletin 2003–2013 Reptile Conservation Herpetological Bulletin 2014–2016 All biodiversity Herpetological Conservation and Biology 2006–2012 Amphibian Conservation Herpetological Conservation and Biology 2006–2012 Reptile Conservation Herpetological Conservation and Biology 2006–2018 All biodiversity Herpetological Journal 1985–2014 All biodiversity Herpetological Monographs 1982–2018 All biodiversity Herpetological Review 1967–2018 All biodiversity Herpetology Notes 2008–2018 All biodiversity Herpetozoa 1988–2018 All biodiversity Human Wildlife Interactions* 2007–2019 All biodiversity Hydrobiologia 2000–2018 All biodiversity Hystrix, the Italian Journal of Mammalogy* 1986–2018 All biodiversity Ibis 1980–2016 All biodiversity ICES Journal of Marine Science 1990–2018 All biodiversity iForest 2008–2016 All biodiversity Insect Conservation and Diversity 2008–2018 All biodiversity Integrative Zoology 2006–2013 All biodiversity International Journal of Pest Management (formerly 1969–1979 All biodiversity PANS Pest Articles & News Summaries 1969 -

25

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

1975, PANS 1976-1979 & Tropical Pest Management 1980-1992) International Journal of Primatology 1980–2019 All biodiversity International Journal of the Commons 2007–2016 All biodiversity International Journal of Wildland Fire 1991–2016 All biodiversity International Wader Studies 1970–1972 All biodiversity International Zoo Yearbook 1960–2019 All biodiversity Invasive Plant Science and Management 2008–2016 All biodiversity Israel Journal of Ecology & Evolution 1963–2013 All biodiversity Italian Journal of Zoology 1978–2013 All biodiversity Journal for Nature Conservation* 2002–2018 All biodiversity Journal of Animal Ecology* 1932–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Apicultural Research 1962–2009 All biodiversity Journal of Applied Animal Nutrition 2012–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 1998–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Applied Ecology* 1964–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 1962–2016 All biodiversity Journal of Arid Environments 1993–2017 All biodiversity Journal of Avian Biology 1980–2016 All biodiversity Journal of Bat Research & Conservation (formerly 2000–2018 All biodiversity Barbastella)* Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 1999–2018 All biodiversity Journal of Coastal Research 2015–2018 All biodiversity Journal of Ecology* 1933–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Ecology & Natural Resources 2017–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Environmental Management* 1973–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and 2000–2018 All biodiversity Ecology Journal of Field Ornithology 1980–2016 All biodiversity Journal of Forest Research* 1996–2018 All biodiversity Journal of Great Lakes Research 1975–2017 All biodiversity Journal of Herpetological Medicine and Surgery 2009–2018 All biodiversity Journal of Herpetology 1968–2016 All biodiversity Journal of Insect Conservation 1997–2018 All biodiversity Journal of Insect Science 2003–2018 All biodiversity Journal of Kansas Herpetology 2002–2011 All biodiversity Journal of Mammalian Evolution 1993–2014 All biodiversity Journal of Mammalogy* 1919–2018 All biodiversity Journal of Mountain Science 2004–2016 All biodiversity Journal of Negative Results: Ecology & 2004–2016 All biodiversity Evolutionary Biology Journal of North American Herpetology 2014–2017 All biodiversity Journal of Ornithology 2004–2018 All biodiversity Journal of Primatology 2012–2013 All biodiversity Journal of Raptor Research 1966–2016 All biodiversity

26

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Journal of Sea Research 1961–2018 All biodiversity Journal of the Japanese Institute of Landscape 1934–2017 All biodiversity Architecture Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the 1887–2018 All biodiversity United Kingdom Journal of Tropical Ecology* 1986–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Vegetation Science 1990–2017 All biodiversity Journal of Wetlands Ecology 2008–2012 All biodiversity Journal of Wetlands Environmental Management 2012–2016 All biodiversity Journal of Wildlife Diseases 1965–2012 All biodiversity Journal of Wildlife Management* 1945–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 2013–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 1970–2019 All biodiversity Journal of Zoology* 1966–2019 All biodiversity Jurnal Primatologi Indonesia 2009 All biodiversity Kansas Herpetological Society Newsletter 1974–2001 All biodiversity Knowledge and Management of Aquatic 1986–2018 All biodiversity Ecosystems (formerly Bulletin Français de la Pêche et de la Pisciculture) Lake and Reservoir Management 1984 –2016 All biodiversity Land Degradation and Development 1989–2016 All biodiversity Land Use Policy 1984–2012 Soil Fertility Latin American Journal of Aquatic Mammals 2002–2018 All biodiversity Lemur News 1993–2012 All biodiversity Limnologica - Ecology and Management of Inland 1999–2018 All biodiversity Waters Mammal Research* 2001–2018 All biodiversity Mammal Review* 1970–2018 All biodiversity Mammal Study* 2005–2018 All biodiversity Mammalia* 1937–2018 All biodiversity Mammalian Biology* 2002–2018 All biodiversity Mammalian Genome 1991–2013 All biodiversity Management of Biological Invasions 2010–2016 All biodiversity Mangroves and Salt Marshes 1996–1999 All biodiversity Marine and Freshwater Research 1980–2018 All biodiversity Marine Ecology 1980–2018 All biodiversity Marine Ecology Progress Series 2000–2018 All biodiversity Marine Environmental Research 1978–2018 All biodiversity Marine Mammal Science 1985–2019 All biodiversity Marine Pollution Bulletin 2010–2018 All biodiversity Marine Turtle Newsletter 1976–2018 All biodiversity Mesoamerican Herpetology 2014–2017 All biodiversity Mires and Peat 2006–2016 All biodiversity Natural Areas Journal 1992–2017 All biodiversity Nature Conservation 2012–2019 All biodiversity

27

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Neobiota 2011–2017 All biodiversity Neotropical Entomology 2004–2018 All biodiversity Neotropical Primates 1993–2012 All biodiversity New Journal of Botany 2011–2013 All biodiversity New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater 1967–2018 All biodiversity Research New Zealand Journal of Zoology* 1974–2019 All biodiversity New Zealand Plant Protection 2000–2016 All biodiversity Northwest Science 2007–2016 All biodiversity Oecologia* 1969–2019 All biodiversity Oikos* 1949–2019 All biodiversity Ornitologia Neotropical 1990–2018 All biodiversity Oryx* 1950–2019 All biodiversity Ostrich 1980–2016 All biodiversity Pacific Conservation Biology* 1993–2019 All biodiversity Pakistan Journal of Zoology 2004–2013 All biodiversity Phyllomedusa 2002–2018 All biodiversity Plant Ecology 1948–2007 All biodiversity Plant Protection Quarterly 2008–2016 All biodiversity PLOS* 1980–2018 Key word: ‘bat*’ Polish Journal of Ecology 2002–2013 All biodiversity Population Ecology 1952–2013 All biodiversity Preslia 1973–2017 All biodiversity Primate Conservation 1981–2014 All biodiversity Primates 1957–2013 All biodiversity Rangeland Ecology & Management (previously 1948–2016 All biodiversity Journal of Range Management 1948-2004) Raptors Conservation 2005–2016 All biodiversity Regional Studies in Marine Science 2015–2018 All biodiversity Reptile Rap - Newsletter of the South Asian Reptile 1999–2016 All biodiversity Network (SARN) Restoration Ecology* 1993–2019 All biodiversity Riparian Ecology and Conservation 2013–2017 All biodiversity River Research and Applications 1987–2016 All biodiversity Russian Journal of Herpetology 1994–2018 All biodiversity Slovak Raptor Journal 2007–2016 All biodiversity Small Ruminant Research 1988–2017 All biodiversity Soil Biology & Biochemistry 1969–2012 Soil Fertility South African Journal of Botany 1982–2016 All biodiversity South African Journal of Wildlife Research 1971–2014 All biodiversity South American Journal of Herpetology 2006–2018 All biodiversity Southern Forests: a journal of Forest Science 2008–2013 All biodiversity Systematic Reviews Centre for Evidence-Based 2004–2016 All biodiversity Conservation* Testudo 1978–2017 All biodiversity

28

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

The Condor 1980–2009 All biodiversity The Open Ornithology Journal 2008–2016 All biodiversity The Rangeland Journal 1976–2016 All biodiversity The Southwestern Naturalist 1956–2018 All biodiversity Trends in Ecology and Evolution* 1986–2019 All biodiversity Tropical Conservation Science 2008–2018 All biodiversity Tropical Ecology 1960–2018 All biodiversity Tropical Grasslands 1967–2010 All biodiversity Tropical Zoology 1988–2018 All biodiversity Turkish Journal of Zoology 1996–2014 All biodiversity Ursus 1968–2019 All biodiversity Vietnamese Journal of Primatology 2007–2009 All biodiversity Wader Study Group Bulletin 1970–1977 All biodiversity Waterbirds 1983–2016 All biodiversity Weed Biology and Management 2001–2016 All biodiversity Weed Research 1961–2017 All biodiversity West African Journal of Applied Ecology 2000–2016 All biodiversity Western North American Naturalist 2000–2017 All biodiversity Wetlands 1981–2016 All biodiversity Wetlands Ecology and Management 1989–2016 All biodiversity Wildfowl 1948–2018 All biodiversity Wildlife Biology* 1995–2013 All biodiversity Wildlife Monographs 1958–2013 All biodiversity Wildlife Research* 1956–2012 Bat Conservation 1974–2018 All biodiversity Wildlife Society Bulletin* 1973–2018 All biodiversity Wilson Journal of Ornithology 1980–2016 All biodiversity Zeitschrift für Jagdwissenschaft 1955–2003 All biodiversity Zhurnal Obshchei Biologii 1972–2013 All biodiversity Zoo Biology 1982–2019 All biodiversity ZooKeys 2008–2013 All biodiversity Zoologica Scripta 1971–2014 All biodiversity Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 1856–2013 All biodiversity Zootaxa 2004–2014 All biodiversity

29

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

APPENDIX 2. Non-English journals (and years) searched Non-English journals (and years) searched and for which relevant papers have been added to the Conservation Evidence discipline-wide literature database. An asterisk indicates the journals most relevant to this synopsis.

Journal Years Topic Language searched Mertensiella 1988–2017 All biodiversity German Salamandra 1965–2018 All biodiversity German Der Zoologische Garten: Zeitschrift für die gesamte 2007–2017 All biodiversity German Tiergärtnerei (Neue Folge) The Zoological Garden Insecta 1992–2014 All biodiversity German Tuexenia 1981–2016 All biodiversity German Libellula 1982–2016 All biodiversity German Forstarchiv 2007–2017 All biodiversity German Forestry Archive Zeitschrift für Feldherpetologie 1994–2017 All biodiversity German Journal for Field Herpetology Arachnologische Mitteilungen 1991–2017 All biodiversity German Arachnological Letters Fachzeitschrift für Waldökologie, 2004–2016 All biodiversity German Landschaftsforschung und Naturschutz Journal for Forest Ecology, Landscape Research and Nature Conservation Silva Fera: Wissenschaftliche Nachrichten aus dem 2012–2017 All biodiversity German Wildnisgebiet Dürrenstein Silva Fera: Scientific News from the Dürrenstein Wilderness Area Inatura Forschung Online 1996–2007 All biodiversity German Inatura Research Online ABU-Info (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Biologischer 2006–2017 All biodiversity German Umweltschutz im Kreis Soest e.V.) ABU-Info (Working Group for Biological Environmental Protection in Soest District ANLiegen Natur: 'Zeitschrift für Naturschutz, Pflege 2006–2017 All biodiversity German der Kulturlandschaft und Nachhaltige Entwicklung Concerning Nature: Journal for Nature Conservation and Applied Landscape Ecology Natur und Landschaft 1990–2017 All biodiversity German Nature and Landscape Pulsatilla 2000–2007 All biodiversity German Ornithologische Beobachter 1950–2017 All biodiversity German Ornithological Observer

30

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Die Orchidee 1949–2016 All biodiversity German The Orchid Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung 2003–2017 All biodiversity German Conservation and Landscape Planning Hercynia 1963–2017 All biodiversity German Allgemeine Forst und Jagdzeitung 2000–2016 All biodiversity German German Journal of Forest Research Nyctalus* 2005–2017 All biodiversity German International Bat Journal Ornithologischer Anzeiger 1951–2017 All biodiversity German Ornithological Journal Archiv für Forstwesen und Landschaftsökologie 2013 All biodiversity German Archive for Forestry and Landscape Ecology Botanik und Naturschutz in Hessen 1987–2018 All biodiversity German Botany and Nature Conservation in Hessen The Bird Fauna 2005–2017 All biodiversity German Die Vogelwelt Biodiversität und Naturschutz in Ostösterreich 2015–2018 All biodiversity German Biodiversity and Conservation in Eastern Austria Journal für Ornithologie 1959–2003 All biodiversity German Journal of Ornithology Mitteilungen des Badischen Landesvereins für 1953–2015 All biodiversity German Naturkunde und Naturschutz Communications of the Baden Association for Natural History and Nature Conservation Freiberg Online Geoscience - FOG 1998–2017 All biodiversity German Gesunde Pflanzen: Pflanzenschutz, 2002–2017 All biodiversity German Verbraucherschutz, Umweltschutz Healthy Plants: Crop Protection, Consumer Protection, Environment Protection Vogelwarte 2005–2017 All biodiversity German The Bird Observatory Die Bodenkultur: Journal of Land Management, Food 2016–2017 All biodiversity German and Environment The Soil Culture: Journal for Land Management, Food and Environment RANA - Mitteilungen für Feldherpetologie und 1983–2016 All biodiversity German Ichthyofaunistik RANA - Communications for Field Herpetology and Ichthyofauna Die Erde 1952–2004 All biodiversity German The Earth Auenmagazin 2010–2017 All biodiversity German Floodplains Journal

31

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Bulletin de la Société des Naturalistes 1950–2017 All biodiversity German Luxembourgeois and Bulletin of the Luxemburgian Naturalist Society French Mammalian Science* 1961–2016 All biodiversity Japanese 哺乳類科学 The Journal of the Japanese Landscape Architectural 1925–1927 All biodiversity Japanese Society 造園学雑誌 Landscape Ecology and Management 2005–2016 All biodiversity Japanese 景観生態学 Japanese Journal of Ecology 1954–2017 All biodiversity Japanese 日本生態学会誌 Doubutsugaku zasshi 1888–1983 All biodiversity Japanese 動物学雑誌 Bulletin of the Herpetological Society of Japan 1999–2008 All biodiversity Japanese 爬虫両棲類学会報 Journal of the Japanese Forest Society 2005–2017 All biodiversity Japanese 日本森林学会誌 Wildlife and Human Society 2013–2017 All biodiversity Japanese 野生生物と社会 Ecology and Civil Engineering 1998–2017 All biodiversity Japanese 応用生態工学 Japanese Journal of Conservation Ecology 1996–2016 All biodiversity Japanese 保全生態学研究 Journal of Mammalogical Society of Japan* 1959–1986 All biodiversity Japanese 哺乳動物学雑誌 Landscape Research Japan Online 2008–2017 All biodiversity Japanese ランドスケープ研究(オンライン論文集) Bulletin of the International Association for 2002–2003 All biodiversity Japanese Landscape Ecology-Japan 国際景観生態学会日本支部会報 Strix 1982–2017 All biodiversity Japanese ストリクス Journal of the Japanese Forestry Society 1985–2004 All biodiversity Japanese 日本林学会誌 Japanese Journal of Ornithology 1917–2015 All biodiversity Japanese 日本鳥学会誌 Wildlife Conservation Japan 1995–2013 All biodiversity Japanese 野生生物保護 Journal of Natural Environment 2010–2017 All biodiversity Persian نشریه محیط زیست طبیعی

32

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Experimental Animal Biology 2012–2017 All biodiversity Persian زیست شناسی جانوری تجربی Journal of Environmental Sciences 2004–2017 All biodiversity Persian علوم محیعلوم محیطیطی Journal of Animal Environment 2014–2017 All biodiversity Persian فصلنامه محیط زیست جانوری Journal of Environmental Studies 1975–2017 All biodiversity Persian محیط شناسی Environmental Researches 2010–2017 All biodiversity Persian پژوهش های محیط زیست Iranian Journal of Applied Ecology 2012–2017 All biodiversity Persian بوم شناسی کاربردی Iranian Journal of Natural Resources 2002–2009 All biodiversity Persian مجله منابع طبیعی ایران Journal of Animal Researches 2013–2017 All biodiversity Persian پژوهش های جانوری Iheringia Série Zoologia 2000–2018 All biodiversity Portuguese Revista Bioikos 1987–2016 All biodiversity Portuguese Brazilian Journal of Ecology 1997–2009 All biodiversity Portuguese Revista Brasileira de Ecologia Biota Neotropica 2001–2011 All biodiversity Portuguese Floresta 1969–2017 All biodiversity Portuguese Boletim da Sociedade Brasileira de Mastozoologi* 1985–2017 All biodiversity Portuguese Biodiversidade Brasileira 2011–2016 All biodiversity Portuguese Revista Brasileira de Gestão Ambiental e 2014–2017 All biodiversity Portuguese Sustentabilidade MG Biota 2008–2016 All biodiversity Portuguese Chiroptera Neotropical* 1995–2015 All biodiversity Portuguese Evolução e Conservação da Biodiversidade 2010–2011 All biodiversity Portuguese Megadiversidade 2005–2009 All biodiversity Portuguese Revista CEPSUL - Biodiversidade e Conservação 2010–2017 All biodiversity Portuguese Marinha Brazilian Journal for Nature Conservation 2003–2009 All biodiversity Portuguese Natureza & Conservação Neotropical Biology and Conservation 2006–2017 All biodiversity Portuguese Russian Journal of Ornithology 1993–2017 All biodiversity Russian Русский орнитологический журнал Herald of Game Management 2007–2016 All biodiversity Russian Вестник охотоведения Bulletin of Moscow Society of Naturalists. Biological 1935–2016 All biodiversity Russian series Бюллетень МОИП, серия биологическая Russian Journal of Ecology 1993–2017 All biodiversity Russian Экология

33

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Povolzhsky Journal of Ecology 2002–2016 All biodiversity Russian Поволжский экологический журнал Current Studies in Herpetology 2000–2016 All biodiversity Russian Современная герпетология Biology Bulletin 1957–2017 All biodiversity Russian Известия РАН, серия биологическая Russian Journal of Zoology 1939–2017 All biodiversity Russian Зоологический журнал Steppe Bulletin 1998–2016 All biodiversity Russian Степной бюллетень Journal of Ichthyology 1961–2017 All biodiversity Russian Вопросы ихтиологии Contemporary Problems of Ecology 1994–2017 All biodiversity Russian Сибирский экологический журнал Mammalogy Notes* 2014–2017 All biodiversity Spanish Mastozoología Neotropical* 1994–2017 All biodiversity Spanish Neotropical Mastozoology Edentata 1994–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Ecología Austral 2001–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Austral Ecology Revista Catalana de Ornitologia 2002–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Catalan Journal of Ornithology Ardeola 1954– 2019 All biodiversity Spanish Hidrobiológica 1991–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Hydrobiology Gestión Ambiental 1999–2017 All biodiversity Spanish Ocelotlán 2003–2012 All biodiversity Spanish A Carriza: Sociedad Gallega de Ornitologia 2001–2009 All biodiversity Spanish Revista Chilena de Ornitología 2016–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Chilean Journal of Ornithology Novitates Caribaea 1999–2019 All biodiversity Spanish Madera y Bosques 1995–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Wood and Forests Revista Nicaragüense de Biodiversidad 2015–2019 All biodiversity Spanish Nicaraguan Journal of Biodiversity Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 2005–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Mexican Journal of Biodiversity Mediterránea 1982–2015 All biodiversity Spanish Mediterranean Semiárida 2013–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Boletín de la Real Sociedad Española de Historia 2003–2017 All biodiversity Spanish Natural Bulletin of the Royal Spanish Society of Natural History

34

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Bosques Latitud Cero 2014–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Forests Latitude Zero Anales de Biología 1984–2019 All biodiversity Spanish Revista Peruana de Biología 1974–2019 All biodiversity Spanish Peruvian Journal of Biology Boletín Científico Centro de Museos 1996–2019 All biodiversity Spanish Bulletin of the Museum Scientific Center Revista de Biología Tropical 1976–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Journal of Tropical Biology Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 1897–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Chilean Journal of Natural History Therya* 2010–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Cuadernos de Herpetología 2010–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Herpetology notes Boletín de la Sociedad Argentina de Botánica 2013–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Bulletin of the Argentinean Society of Botany Butlletí del Grup Català d'Anellament 1981–2001 All biodiversity Spanish Bulletin of the Catalan Ring Group Orinoquia 2003–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Acta Zoológica Mexicana 1984–2019 All biodiversity Spanish Mexican Zoological Journal Biodiversity and Natural History 2015–2017 All biodiversity Spanish Galemys* 1997–2017 All biodiversity Spanish Boletín Chileno de Ornitología 1994–2015 All biodiversity Spanish Chilean Ornithology Bulletin Zoologica Baetica 1990–2015 All biodiversity Spanish Centros: Revista Cientifica Universitaria 2012–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Centros: Scientific Journal of the University Huitzil: Revista Mexicana de Ornitología 2000–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Journal of Mexican Ornithology Bioma (El Salvador) 2012–2016 All biodiversity Spanish Quebracho 2008–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Etología 1989–2003 All biodiversity Spanish Ethology Historia Natural 2011–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Natural History Arxius of Miscel·lània Zoològica 2003–2019 All biodiversity Spanish Agrociencia Uruguay 1997–2017 All biodiversity Spanish Agroscience Uruguay Ecología Aplicada 2002–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Applied Ecology Boletín de la Asociación Herpetológica Española 2004–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Bulletin of the Spanish Herpetological Association El Hornero: Revista de Ornitología Neotropical 2003–2017 All biodiversity Spanish

35

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

Revista Española de Herpetologia 2003–2007 All biodiversity Spanish Spanish Journal of Herpethology Revista Internacional de Contaminación Ambiental 1985–2018 All biodiversity Spanish International Journal of Pollution Colombia Forestal 2000–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Revista Mexicana de Mastozoología* 1995–2017 All biodiversity Spanish Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Forestales 2010–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Mexican Journal of Forestry Sciences Boletín de Biodiversidad de Chile 2009–2014 All biodiversity Spanish Bulletin of Biodiversity of Chile Studia Oecológica 1981–1995 All biodiversity Spanish Grupo Jaragua 1997–2011 All biodiversity Spanish Ecosistemas y Recursos Agropecuarios 1994–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Ecosystems and Agropecuary Resources BioScriba 2008–2017 All biodiversity Spanish Ecosistemas 2001–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Ecosystems Journal Cedamaz 2014–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 2001–2019 All biodiversity Spanish Folia Amazónica 1988–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Notulas Faunisticas 2008–2018 All biodiversity Spanish Caldasia 1940–2019 All biodiversity Spanish

36

Protocol registered on 23-07-2020: https://osf.io/643jy

APPENDIX 3. Literature reviewed for the Bat Conservation Synopsis The diagram below (from Berthinussen et al. 2020) will be updated and included in the synopsis document to show the numbers of journals and report series searched for the updated synopsis, the total number of publications searched (title and abstract) within those, and the number of publications that were summarized from each source of literature.

English language database Summarized Journals Papers scanned No: 81 245 636,240

Non-English database Summarized Journals Papers scanned No: 6 7 1,492 No:

Unpublished report database Summarized Report series Reports scanned No: 0 4 1,761

Number of publications summarized from existing databases: 87

Specific journal searches (by author) Summarized Journals Papers scanned No: 39 22 33,212

Specific report series searches (by author) Summarized Report series Reports scanned No: 9 7 websites 271 Total number of publications summarized from searches: 135 Identified from reviews Summarized No: 8

Identified by advisory board Summarized Papers/reports suggested Total number of publications No: 52 120 summarized: 195 37